Enlightened or confused?

I'm a Fellow of the RSA (Royal Society of Arts, see www.theRSA.org ) and I enjoy reading the RSA Journal - interesting, intelligent, illuminating writing on matters which matter. You can see most of the articles on the RSA website if you're interested.

But there are a couple of things in the Summer 08 issue which made me pause - and which aren't (so far as I could see) covered in the online version.

First, the result of a survey of RSA Journal readers which asked "Should the state be more active in creating intelligence-enhancing environments?" Yes, said 83% of respondents.

Second, a timeline projected into the future which focuses not on new things which might be expected to appear but on old things which might be expected to disappear - or, if not disappear, then diminish into insignificance. And there, between the year 2010 and the year 2020, is the suggestion that (you guessed it) "libraries" will go the way of the dodo and the dinosaur.

Now, is it just me or is there a contradiction between these two conclusions? Because it seems to me that libraries (OK then, some libraries) are the best type of "intelligence-enhancing environment" and society therefore needs them to grow in investment and impact, not diminish.

But of course the contradiction illustrates one of the Great Truths of Our Times: people simply don't connect their concept of a "library" with their idea of an "inteligence-enhancing environment" or indeed a "learning environment" or an "information/knowledge rich environment."

So let's help the Fellows of the RSA to make that connection. Views are invited on the timeline. Go to www.theRSA.org/fellowship/journal and click on "views" - the rest is up to you...